MONEY IN POLITICS CONSENSUS QUESTIONS WITH LINKS TO BACKGROUND PAPERS

This update on Money In Politics builds on the League’s current position on campaign finance. The consensus questions in Part I address the goals of campaign finance regulation in terms of democratic values. The questions in Part II relate to the extent to which First Amendment protections like free speech and freedom of the press should apply to various speakers and activities in the campaign finance context. Part III asks about methods of campaign finance regulation. You are asked to respond to the questions without regard for the Supreme Court’s current views on the First Amendment. In responding to each question, please interpret the words in their most general sense. Keep in mind that the LWV intentionally words positions that are derived from member study in the broadest possible way so that our positions have relevance for many years. Future national Boards will determine when and how to apply our positions.

An optional comment section is included at the end of each of the three parts. Please note that while comments will be read and considered, only responses to questions can be tabulated.

Because issues around Money in Politics and its First Amendment implications are so complex, there is some overlap in the topics covered in the background papers. For each of the three question parts below we have matched papers to provide helpful background information on those topics. All of the readings can be found at http://forum.lwv.org/category/member-resources/our-work/money-politics-review .

PART I QUESTIONS: Democratic Values and Interests with Respect to Financing Political Campaigns

Background Readings

Here are readings that provide background on the issues that the Part I questions are asking about:

g. Ensure the public’s right to know who is using money to influence elections.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

h. Combat corruption and undue influence in government.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

2. Evaluate whether the following activities are types of political corruption: (Please respond to each item in Question 2.)

A candidate or officeholder agrees to vote or work in favor of a donor’s interests in exchange for a campaign contribution.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

b. An officeholder or her/his staff gives greater access to donors.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

c. An officeholder votes or works to support policies that reflect the preferences of individuals or organizations in order to attract contributions from them.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

d. An office holder seeks political contributions implying that there will be retribution unless a donation is given.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

e. The results of the political process consistently favor the interests of significant campaign contributors.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

OPTIONAL COMMENTS (250 word limit):

PART II QUESTIONS: First Amendment Protections for Speakers and Activities in Political Campaigns

This set of questions is designed to determine the extent to which the First Amendment protections of free speech and freedom of the press should apply to different speakers or activities in the regulation of campaign finance. Free speech and free press provide essentially the same protections to speakers, writers, publishers and advertising, whether or not they are part of the institutional press, and largely regardless of the medium. Essentially, these protections extend to any conduct that is expressive. Many of the options below would be found unconstitutional by the current Supreme Court, but we are seeking your League’s views, not those of the Court. These are broad, overarching questions about spending to influence an election, including independent spending, contributions to candidates, broadcast news and other communication expenditures.

Background Readings

Here are readings that provide background on the issues that the Part II questions ask about:

.Many different individuals and organizations use a variety of methods to communicate their views to voters in candidate elections. Should spending to influence an election by any of the following be limited?(Please respond to each item in Question 1.)

a. Individual citizens, including wealthy individuals like George Soros and the Koch Brothers.

b. Political Action Committees, sponsored by an organization, such as the League of Conservation Voters, Chevron, the American Bankers Association, and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), whose campaign spending comes from contributions by individuals associated with the sponsoring organization, such as employees, stockholders, members and volunteers.

2. The press plays a major role in candidate elections through editorial endorsements, news coverage, and other communications directly to the public that are often important to the outcome. Should such spending to influence an election by any of the following be limited?

In order to achieve the goals for campaign finance regulation, should the League support? (Please respond to each item in Question 1 a and b.)

a. Abolishing SuperPACs and spending coordinated or directed by candidates, other than a candidate’s own single campaign committee.

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

b. Restrictions on direct donations and bundling by lobbyists? (Restrictions may include monetary limits as well as other regulations.)

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

c. Public funding for candidates? Should the League support: (You may respond to more than one item in Question 1 c.)

i. Voluntary public financing of elections where candidates who choose to participate must also abide by reasonable spending limits?

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

ii. Mandatory public financing of elections where candidates must participate and abide by reasonable spending limits?

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

iii. Public financing without spending limits on candidates?

☐ Agree ☐ Disagree ☐ No consensus

2. How should campaign finance regulations be administered and enforced? (You may choose more than one response for Question 2.)

☐ a. By an even-numbered commission with equal representation by the two major political parties to ensure partisan fairness (current Federal Election Commission [FEC] structure)?

☐ b. By an odd-numbered commission with at least one independent or nonpartisan commissioner to ensure decisions can be made in case of partisan deadlock?

☐ c. By structural and budget changes to the FEC (e.g., commission appointments, staffing, security, budget, decision making process) that would allow the agency to function effectively and meet its legislative and regulatory mandates.